ILNews

Man accused of planning to blow up courthouse

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A Pike County man was arrested by police after they discovered his plan to blow up the county courthouse if he was found guilty in his trial Wednesday.

Kerry A. Thomas, Oakland City, is charged with Class A felony unlawful possession of a destructive device or explosive to kill, injure, or to destroy property; and Class C felony unlawful possession of a destructive device.

The Pike County Sheriff's Department executed a search warrant of Thomas' home Nov. 1 because they believed evidence of the murder of Patrick E. King would be found at Thomas' property. Police were looking for human remains, DNA, a belt buckle, and anything else that may have indicated Thomas was involved in King's murder when they discovered bomb-making materials.

Police found PVC pipe, a blasting cap, detonation cord, a cast booster, and a degraded cast booster. Those materials could be exploded and possibly kill someone by using a household battery, according to the probable cause affidavit.

Allegedly Thomas told at least two people he planned to set off a bomb in the Pike Circuit courtroom to kill himself and others if he was found guilty at the end of his trial on Wednesday. Thomas was on trial for criminal confinement, intimidation, pointing a firearm, and battery stemming from an incident in March, according to the Pike County Clerk's Office.

The court documents don't indicate whether anything related to the King case was found on Thomas' property.

A hearing in Thomas' case is set for Nov. 12.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT